MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2126123765

Fifth Summit of the Americas, Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, April 2009: Background, Agenda, and Expectations

2009· article· en· W2126123765 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter J. Meyer

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMaritime Ports and Logistics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSummitLatin AmericansPresidential systemPolitical sciencePort (circuit theory)Government (linguistics)DemocracyAdministration (probate law)GeographyPoliticsCartographyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fifth Summit of the Americas in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago, which is scheduled to be held April 17-19, 2009, will be the first hemispheric forum for President Barack Obama to engage with leaders from across Latin America and the Caribbean. The Port of Spain Summit will also be the first meeting of all 34 democratic heads of government from Latin America, the Caribbean, Canada, and the United States since the contentious 2005 Summit in Mar del Plata, Argentina. Taking place less than four months after the U.S. presidential inauguration, the Summit could set the tone for hemispheric relations during the early stages of the Obama Administration. There have been four Summits of the Americas, two Special Summits of the Americas, and a number of ministerial-level Summits held since 1994. Past Summits have led to a number of successful initiatives in the region, including the creation of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, reductions in the cost of remittance transfers, and increased provision of anti-retroviral therapy to victims of HIV/AIDS. Although some view the most recent Summit as a failure because of its divisiveness, it too produced a number of important initiatives, including support for Haiti's democracy, improved infrastructure, and reductions in child labor. Despite these accomplishments, many observers have criticized the Summits of the Americas. Civil society representatives contend that the Summits lack transparency and believe their organizations should play larger roles in the Summit process. Some observers have questioned the Summits' effectiveness, drawing attention to the fact that the majority of Summit goals have never been met. Other analysts doubt the Summits' ability to advance U.S. interests and argue that the United States should pursue its own priorities outside of the Summit process.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.932

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.159 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of North Texas Digital Library (University of North Texas)Same topicMaritime Ports and LogisticsFrench-language works237,207